That's How It Happened

The British press is touting a huge "clash of cultures" between Prince Charles and my ex-Prof, Michael Baum. Prince Charles has recently spoken out in favour of wider incorporation of evidence based complementary therapies into the NHS, whereas Prof Baum is the priniciple signatory on a letter to the Times, calling for restriction of unproven complementary therapies within the NHS. Despite what the press might think, these two positions are not opposed. Both "sides" argue for selectivity in choosing to fund therapies with proven benefit.
The real opponents are the complementary therapy industry, who consistently try to defend homeopathy. Quoting from the official industry response:

"So, Baum and colleagues really need to stop patronising the public and realise that people want these disciplines - because they know that they work. Perhaps Baum and colleagues might like to get on with the job of researching complementary medicine to find out why these helpful disciplines work - and while they are at it perhaps they could look into the reasons why over 40,000 people are killed and over 850,000 injured in the UK each year as a result of conventional medical blunders."

Apart from the obvious diversionary tactics re: medical error, the problem here is that homeopathy really does not work, and if homeopaths could admit that, they would be out of a job. "Conventional doctors" can and do research alternative therapies. One blinded controlled trial from my own unit found benefit for acupuncture in overactive bladder syndrome. Nobody however can find any benefit, over and above placebo response for homeopathy. Both Cochrane and Bandolier (the two foremost sources for evidence based medicine) have found a complete lack of rigourous supporting evidence for homeopathy. Prof Edzard Ernst had his chair funded specifically to find such supporting evidence. His opinion?

"Homeopathic remedies don't work, study after study has shown it is simply the purest form of placebo. You may as well take a glass of water than a homeopathic medicine."

It is more than just a question of funding within the NHS. It would be unethical to prescribe a medicine that you do not believe works, and based on the current evidence, no-one without self-interest in homeopathy should believe in homeopathy.

Tags: homeopathy, princecharles